# Re: Flies and ultimate reality

```
On 25 Dec 2012, at 04:10, Stephen P. King wrote:```
```
```
```On 12/24/2012 7:27 PM, meekerdb wrote:
```
```On 12/24/2012 3:43 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
```
```
On 12/24/2012 3:22 PM, meekerdb wrote:
```
```On 12/24/2012 11:41 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
```
```
Dear Roger,

```
Flies can unify their vision because the distance between their individual eyes is small and the number is finite. One can still manage to get a mutually commuting set of observations in these conditions. When one has an arbitrarily large distance between a pair of "eyes" and the number of them is infinite then it is impossible to have a mutually commuting set of observations. This is the problem of omniscience.
```
```
I have two eyes and no problem unifying them. Vision takes place in the brain, not the eyes.
```
Brent
--
```
```Hi Brent,

I think you missed the point I was trying to make.
```
```
```
Apparently. You are basing this impossibility on a literal infinity - not just "very very many"? In that case I'd agree because the literal infinity is itself impossible.
```
Brent
--
```
Pfft, really? Oh my, you are hard up to save an obviously false idea! If the infinity is merely potential, the situation is worse! Think about it, how many different 1p are *possible*? Many, at least! I submit to you that the number must be infinite. This would be equivalent to an infinite number of propositions.
```
```
The number of human 1p is infinite if you let the human skull growing arbitrarily.
```

```
It should be obvious that to find a SAT solution to such is impossible for any classical system.
```
```
SAT is Sigma_0. SAT is decidable. We can find all the SAT solutions, if patient enough. No doubt that it can take some time to see if a classical propositional formula with 10^1000 propositional variables is a tautology. P = NP would not necessarily help, because the polynomial bounding complexity can be quite growing if it has big coefficient.
```
```
For biology and theology the interesting things happens on the border of the Sigma_1 complete structures. Only bankers and engineers really need to talk the Sigma_0, and subtractability issues. By comp, we will have to derive why, from the geometry and topology of the border of the Sigma_1, seen in 1p. UDA and AUDA illustrates that the border get his geometry and topology from self-reference, starting from sigma_1 sentences (which represent in arithmetic the UD states).
```
Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to